[wsia] Corrected Website Minutes for 07-12-02

OASIS Web Services for Interactive Applications Technical Committee

12 July 2002

teleconference 12:00-1:00pm EST

Minutes

Attendance

William Cox      BEA
Graeme Riddell       Bowstreet               y
Greg Giles     Cisco
Srinivas Vadhri    Commerce One
Kirk Wilson Computer Associates     y
Sean Fitts     Crossweave
Timothy N. Jones Crossweave              y

Peter Quintas     Divine
Sandra Swearingen DoD
Monica Martin        Drake Certivo           y
Alan Kropp     Epicentric
Patel Ashish France Telecom
Aditi Karandikar France Telecom
Royston Sellman   HP
Eric van Lyndegraf    Kinzan         y

Charles Wiecha IBM (chair)             y
Dan Gisolfi    IBM
Ravi Konuru IBM
Rich Thompson        IBM             y
Shankar        IBM
Ramaswamy
T.V. Raman IBM
Rex Brooks   individual              y
John Kneiling individual      (removing from the list)
Kevin Brinkley Intel
Michael Mahan      Nokia
Martin Chapman     Oracle
Terry Cline       Peregrine Systems
Sasha Aicken   Plumtree
Stefan Beck     SAP
Howard Melman        Silverstream
Jeffrey C. Broberg Silverstream
Suresh Damodaran    Sterling Commerce
Eilon Reshef   WebCollage
Gil Tayar     WebCollage

Agenda

1. Roll call and minutes
2. Update on joint interface spec and WSIA goals for the next draft
3. Plans for preparing a draft Customization spec in parallel with the joint interfaces.

Meeting

12:00     roll call + minutes.
To fulfill the decision made prior to the F2F of staggering these calls with the WSRP calls we?ll meet again Friday of next week (19th) and then the following Thursday (25th) and then every other Thursday. Rex is now the webmaster and is bringing the site up to date. Subcommittee minutes should be forwarded to the list so they can be posted too.

12:10     Status of joint interfaces and WSIA-specific goals

0.21 of the joint spec is coming out today. Also starting the process of putting a User Guide together (strawman was developed at F2F). Smaller group also looking at an object model and extensibility model that might lead to some refactoring and layering - Policy and Design issues came up at the F2F.

Day 1 of WSRP suggested that the interface was made too complex by trying to do stateful/stateless, persistence, user state, etc. Rich leading effort to back up and see if we can identify separate objects in the interface to simplify the functionality. This might allow easier extension and selection and pluggability of the functionality.

This might reintroduce choice of a vocabulary of operation names and signatures that are a little more specific to WSRP and WSIA. (We?ve had the idea that there would be a joint spec that accommodated WSRP with a single interface and set of operations. That interface is broader than expected, so we're starting to feel (and investigate) that there may actually be separate interfaces that work alongside each other.)

Thoughts on this?

- So long as we figure out how to piggyback WSIA on top of the base protocol it should be ok? But will we then have a joint spec? The joint spec might then be the Embedded case.

- Can we not build on top of WSRP? Two concerns are then a) operation naming would likely be too portlet-specific, and

(b) danger that a portal-specific API would not be able to support non-portal consumers.

- General rule should be same that the same function should not be allowed in both the WSRP and WSIA interfaces?

We should be able to achieve a joint spec at the component/lifecycle level. The entity stuff might become specific to WSRP. Aim to have a joint spec at the lowest level that both WSRP and WSIA can build on. But we?re probably in trouble if the bottom of the stack is not common - we?d end up with 2 specs.
12:35     Customization (Tim)

Latest thinking is to piggyback cutomizable properties on top of the joint protocol and reuse joint interfaces. Specifically starting to work on initializing model instance values on the producer. Also given the current factoring effort, we probably have the opportunity to carry forward a property interface.

Point of clarification ? need to emphasize that the property interface does not extend the opaque state of the producer but it is a view of the opaque state (of the producer properties).

wsia message